Training Program Evaluation

This article discusses Kirkpatrick's four-level evaluation framework for training programs. It explains how the framework helps in defining every level of training programs and which training skills qualify for the framework. The article also discusses how to evaluate technical and soft skills development training and why orientation and onboard training may not qualify for the framework.

Running head: TRAINING PROGRAM EVALUATION 1
Developing individuals, leaders, and organizations
Student Name
Institutional Affiliation

TRAINING PROGRAM EVALUATION 2
Developing Individuals, Leaders, and Organizations
Kirkpatrick developed the model for determining and evaluating the implications of
training and educational activities. The four levels of assessment consider the training style
whether formal or informal while delineating the level of the training program (Tan & Newman,
2013). Kirkpatrick’s evaluation framework considers the fact that training is a process. Notably,
there is nothing worse than working in a situation that expects you to perform something, but
there is no potential to do it. Training courses facilitate trainees to acquire skills that are essential
for the performance assigned duties (Légaré et al., 2015). Employers need to train and offer
refresher courses to employees on how to maximize their potential to contribute to the attainment
of organization goals. Kirkpatrick’s four-level evaluation framework helps in defining every
level of training programs.
Not all training skills qualify to undergo the four levels of the evaluation framework.
However, the development of technical and soft skills qualifies for Kirkpatrick’s framework. On
the other hand, orientation and onboard training may be problematic or impossible to go through
the four levels of the assessment framework (Kurt, 2018). In the words of Abdulghani et al.
(2014), the evaluation of training extent for employees depends on the nature of training and the
intended ends. Whenever employers want to determine the extent to which their employees have
understood the training program, they are bound to apply the criteria to determine the success or
failures of the process.
Technical and soft skills development training are procedural exercises that involve the
evaluation of employees understanding at various levels. The discipline of analysis and content
writing requires managers to keep track of the perceptions of the employees regarding the
exercise, assess their knowledge of the activity, check whether they have understood the process,

TRAINING PROGRAM EVALUATION 3
and determine the implication on the business (Kirkpatrick et al., 2016). Indeed, technical and
soft skills training is a continuous process requiring assessment at every stage of action. For
example, while training employees on conflict resolution method, it is important to start at the
first level and establish their response to the process. It is not possible to move to the next level
without gathering data and evidence on every process (Tan & Newman, 2013). Practical
completion of the four stages of assessment will make the organization realize comprehensive
understanding of the training program.
Orientation and onboard training involve one-time training, and it is impossible to
include all the four levels of the Kirkpatrick model. For instance, training a new employee on the
vision and mission of a company does not have a quantifiable measure that could be used to
determine their insight of the matter (Kirkpatrick et al., 2016). Even when it could be
measurable, the fact that orientation is a onetime exercise does not qualify it to go through all the
four stages of the Kirkpatrick model. Moreover, letting employees understand the working of a
new machine in a department implies that it is impossible to make a comprehensive evaluation
through the model (Abdulghani et al., 2014). Indeed, orientation and onboard training only allow
the involvement of the first two elements in the order of the model.

TRAINING PROGRAM EVALUATION 4
References
Abdulghani, H. M., Shaik, S. A., Khamis, N., Al-Drees, A. A., Irshad, M., Khalil, M. S., &
Isnani, A. (2014). Research methodology workshops evaluation using the Kirkpatrick’s
model: translating theory into practice. Medical teacher, 36(sup1), S24-S29.
Kirkpatrick, B. D., Whitehead, S. S., Pierce, K. K., Tibery, C. M., Grier, P. L., Hynes, N. A., ...
& Carmolli, M. P. (2016). The live attenuated dengue vaccine TV003 elicits complete
protection against dengue in a human challenge model. Science translational
medicine, 8(330), 1-8.
Kurt, S. (2018). Kirkpatrick Model: Four Levels of Learning Evaluation - Educational
Technology. [online] Educational Technology. Available at:
https://educationaltechnology.net/kirkpatrick-model-four-levels-learning-evaluation/
[Accessed 12 Oct. 2018].
Légaré, F., Freitas, A., Thompson-Leduc, P., Borduas, F., Luconi, F., Boucher, A., & Jacques, A.
(2015). The majority of accredited continuing professional development activities do not
target clinical behavior change. Academic Medicine, 90(2), 197-202.
Tan, K., & Newman, E. (2013). The evaluation of sales force training in retail organizations: a
test of Kirkpatrick's four-level model. International Journal of Management, 30(2), 692.